Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

Mark Andrews <> Wed, 15 October 2014 23:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D301ACE2F for <>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.917
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, PLING_QUERY=0.994, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EM0CWKQXSIG9 for <>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56AFB1ACDFA for <>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32AD01FCAB3; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:26:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8E4160058; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:29:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F6E4160056; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:29:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D687121808CE; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:26:19 +1100 (EST)
To: Michael Thomas <>
From: Mark Andrews <>
References: <> <> <20141014142746.GX31092@Space.Net> <> <20141014145930.GY31092@Space.Net> <> <20141014154111.GZ31092@Space.Net> <> <20141015150422.GW31092@Space.Net> <> <20141015154841.GY31092@Space.Net> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:57:53 -0700." <>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:26:19 +1100
Message-Id: <>
Cc:, Ted Lemon <>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:26:30 -0000

In message <>om>, Michael Thomas writes:
> On 10/15/14, 3:49 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 2014, at 3:01 PM, Michael Thomas <> wrote:
> >> See, I don't find that ideal at all. If I'm swinging around on my backyard
>  trapeze watching
> >> the flying wallendas instructional video from my home jukebox, I really do
> n't want to have
> >> my network break connectivity because I happened to switch to my neighbor'
> s wifi and I
> >> was using a ULA when I could have kept connectivity with a GUA.
> > This is simply a non-sequitur.   It has nothing to do with homenet.   It ha
> s to do with how the stack works on your home, and what the propagation of ra
> dio waves looks like in your back yard.   The assumption that you will be abl
> e to access your jukebox over your neighbor's wifi contains packed in it so m
> uch new protocol work we could fork several working groups to handle it.
> If I use a GUA to my jukebox, the routing will just work regardless of which
> AP I'm currently connected to. With ULA's, not so much. That's hardly a 
> non-sequitur.
> ULA's with mobility are very problematic IMO. I'm a lot more likely to 
> wander onto my
> neighbor's home network than to suffer a flash renumbering from one of 
> my providers.
> Mobility considerations aren't a distant future, they're now.
> Mike

And when you move onto your neighbour's net you will be switching
ssid's and even if you open up your router to allow the traffic in
the BCP 38 filtering should be blocking your packets leaving your
neighbors router.

Now if you want to set up a tunnel between you and your neighbour
to make this work that's fine.  If you don't you will have a different
set of addresses on either network including ULA addresses.  Unless
you have really old stacks your device will pick the new GUA first
to talk to your jukebox when you are on your neighbor's network and
the ULA to talk to it when you are on your own.

Even if you have a old stack, if the application has taken the
lessons from Happy Eyeballs and made it more generic by decreasing
the time before starting the next connection attempt to 100's if
milliseconds when you have multiple server addresses, the resulting
HE algorithms would have fixed the issue for you when it fast failed
to the GUA of the jukebox after changing ssids.  Longest match would
result in the new GUA being used rather than the new ULA.

I tried hard to get the IETF to listen to this for HE.


> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: